Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister sees Twitter's latest move — to develop 'analytical products' based on Twitter data and to encourage third-party developers to do the same — as part of a growing trend toward a new kind of software platform. 'In the past, tool vendors have offered developers languages and code libraries that gave them access to computing functions in simple, standardized ways. In this new paradigm, however, a platform consists of more than just frameworks and APIs. It also comes prepackaged with a complete, rich data set, and often that data is the platform's most valuable aspect. These new "data platforms" are creating exciting new opportunities for developers, though they are not without their challenges.' Chief among these issues are privacy and security, as evidenced by a recent letter to Google from government regulators and activist tools such as PleaseRobMe. But for developers, the challenges also include livelihood. 'Even more than mobile platforms such as Apple's iPhone, a data platform like Twitter's is a walled garden. If Twitter cuts off a developer's access to its data sources for any reason, that developer's business is sunk.' Even those who develop 'cloud middleware' around such data platforms stand to gain little from their efforts, as doing so pits them in competition with their data platform vendors, which are in a far better position to reach potential customers."

Twitter, Facebook, Google, the whole internet "economy" based on a house of cards resting on top of speculation on advertising arms races over the rapidly shrinking pool of disposable income, are just the agonal gasps of capitalism in its death throes.

Sounds reasonable to me. The Red State Strike Farce must be paying one of their cosplay visits here today, because I can't see how your comment was in any way flamebait.

Seriously, Communism was just a reaction to the first great
wave of technology known as "the industrial revolution".

We need original thought, not re-hashed 20th century failed
solutions that arose out of 19th century excess.

As an American I hate to say it, but it seems like the French
have the right idea. Instead of using the excess productivity
gained by technology to drive useless things like war and Facebook,
we should just take more vacations.

That's not to say the French have it perfect--I wager their
beurocracy consumes a lot of time. How about just shorter work
weeks instead? One of the great ironies in this is that Utah,
a state not considered "progressive" instituted shorter work
weeks for state employees.

In other words, technology really did reduce the need for
labor. We just need to find a constructive outlet for the
excess labor. Neither violent revolution, nor wage slavery
in a neoindustrial cubefarm/factory is a constructive outlet.

The need for labour is only fully met when mathematics is complete, scientific discovery is complete and complete technological development has been attained. Good(?) news: none of those will ever happen.

Technology has certainly allowed us to meet the necessities for life---and indeed a much higher standard of living than in the past--with many fewer people farming, running shops, making trinkets, etc., but that doesn't mean we should spend mo

The need for labour is only fully met when mathematics is complete, scientific discovery is complete and complete technological development has been attained. Good(?) news: none of those will ever happen.

The vast majority of mathematical and hard-science is done by doctors of philosophy. Not everybody is cut out to Pile it Higher and Deeper. For example, what will kids do to pay their way through college once a vending machine can handle a customer's request for groceries or a chicken sandwich and fries?

The tendency of the rate of profit to fall means that big capital refuses to invest in any productive industry.

"Big capital" refusing to invest means that "small capital" can make a bigger margin. And then, once the 'productive' industry increases, "big capital" will invest more, margins will shrink, and "small capital" will go look for something else.

Capitalism is ruthlessly adapatable. You will starve to death, but capitalism will continue. Captialism won the cold war -- and capitalism is winning the drug war. If you feel that starving to death is a bad thing, then you're in favor of a change... but capitalism

If I don't buy anything they advertise -- in fact, I block the advertisements themselves -- exactly how is it hurting me to use services supported by advertising?

I see nothing wrong with parting a fool from their money. If people as a whole aren't smart enough to move past the mental abilities of a ferret (ooh, shiney, must have it), well, then they're bringing it on themselves, and I don't feel sorry for them at all.

Go ahead, call me cold hearted, but I learned from my mistakes. It took me the better part of 10 years to learn and recover from those mistakes, but I did it without going begging for help. People need to suck it up, reduce their expenses to the bare essentials, work multiple menial jobs if that's what it takes, sell possessions if they have to. It takes work, and a willingness to do without, but it can be done without needing handouts.

If I don't buy anything they advertise -- in fact, I block the advertisements themselves -- exactly how is it hurting me to use services supported by advertising?

Advertising is stronger than you are. You may believe that you have superpowers that make you impervious to marketing, but some very thorough research done since the 1920's has shown that sooner or later, advertising sinks in. Maybe you can block an ad in a website, but the whole idea of ubiquitous messaging is that if the right don't get ya, the

All of which is predicated on the theory that I buy excess stuff. I pretty much buy necessities only, and if I'm buying a name brand of any of them it's because a)it was cheaper / unit when I was at the store, or b) past personal experience with it has proven it to be of sufficient quality that it is worth seeking out again. Hell, half the time I'm in the store, I don't know if something is a "name brand" or if it's the "store brand". Mostly because I avoid advertising, and partly because I simply don't

It's foolish to tie one's livelihood to something like Twitter. Not only is there the "walled garden" argument, but there's the much more obvious problem: Twitter is a fad and won't be around for very long. Who is Twitter kidding? Not only are they a cheesy fad, but they're a completely unprofitable cheesy fad. Sooner rather than later, Twitter will be relegated to Napster/Friendster/MySpace status (broke and devoid of legitimate users), and any developer who've hitched their star to Twitter will be lef

In the end it all boils down to using this data for advertising (what else could you use this data for to make money as a company?). I don't think it's an exciting development at all, rather it's a pretty boring topic to me: finding out whom to best sell different products to. I just cannot get excited about a problem that doesn't really do anything productive / create anything of true value. Personally I don't have any problems figuring out how to spend my money and actually dislike the idea of being advertised to specifically. In the end we have to realize that no wealth is created by these technologies: there is only so much money to go around for people to buy products. All these advertisement datasets help is finding new ways to get people to spend their money on the "right" thing for them but it doesn't actually create cool new products or give people more money to buy products. Maybe I'm overlooking some exciting key aspect to these datasets (social analysis maybe?) but Im not yet convinced that this is not yet another bubble.

What we're seeing with these "data platforms" is that you can do some restricted things with the data, but you can't just get the data and work on it yourself. Compare, say, Securities and Exchange Commission filings. The entire data set is downloadable for free. (I have an application downloading the updates every night. [downside.com]. So do many Wall Street services.) Don't expect that kind of access from Twitter.

Companies hate to make that data freely available. Even most WHOIS access is throttled, and that's supposed to be public data.
It's not about data volume any more, now that terabyte drives are in the bargain bin at the computer store. It's about control.

"Data platforms" with such restrictive access are really just another form of "digital rights management".